[bigshot]

No. Line level is passed along straight. It isn't processed. Line level is just a plug. You can daisy chain it and it just gets handed from one to the next with no audible loss. The Y splitter off the turntable would likely cause the most problems. But it would be cheap if you wanted to prove to yourself it won't work well.

Ask someone who knows vinyl and they will tell you that you want to keep the path between the cartridge and the phono preamp as direct and short as possible. Once you have run it through the phono preamp and it's at line level, it is a LOT easier to add switch boxes, Y adapters, and all that. But the easiest way is to take line out lfrom the first amp with the turntable hooked up to it and just run it into an AUX input on the second amp. You will be able to play your records on both amps at once that way with no loss in quality.

I know you don't understand what I am suggesting and you had some preconceived idea about how you wanted to handle it, but you asked for the cleanest way to do it and I told you. If you make an effort to understand what I am suggesting, we won't waste so many posts going back and forth.

 

[kid vic]

No. Line level is passed along straight. It isn't processed. Line level is just a plug. You can daisy chain it and it just gets handed from one to the next with no audible loss. The Y splitter off the turntable would likely cause the most problems. But it would be cheap if you wanted to prove to yourself it won't work well.

Ask someone who knows vinyl and they will tell you that you want to keep the path between the cartridge and the phono preamp as direct and short as possible. Once you have run it through the phono preamp and it's at line level, it is a LOT easier to add switch boxes, Y adapters, and all that. But the easiest way is to take line out lfrom the first amp with the turntable hooked up to it and just run it into an AUX input on the second amp. You will be able to play your records on both amps at once that way with no loss in quality.

I know you don't understand what I am suggesting and you had some preconceived idea about how you wanted to handle it, but you asked for the cleanest way to do it and I told you. If you make an effort to understand what I am suggesting, we won't waste so many posts going back and forth.

Lol I understand exactly what you are saying.
If you want to keep the signal path as short as possible, eliminate every additional step between the cartridge and the headphones. No disagreements there. We both understand that the optimal path is one straight unbroken line from the cart to a single amp onto the headphones. Since that is the best path it makes the most sense to not process the phono signal in one amp and then send it to another. Knowing that, I don't want to use both amps at the same time. That is a needles complication. Sure, if your going to split a signal a line level is better, but its better still to not split a signal, which is why I don't want to convert it to a line level until I'm sending it to my headphones. The point of splitting it at the step up transformer passively was that I wouldn't have to have both amps running at the same time.
Regardless of how you want to describe it, everytime an analog signal passes through a stage (passive or active) it degrades. Switching the cables at my step up transformer is the shortest method; for some reason you are insisting that I use both amps at the same time while telling me to keep the chain as simple as possible. It doesn't make sense. To keep the chain simple and clean I'll just manually change the cables at the step up transformer.

I wrote that I assumed the Y-splitter wouldn't work. You've managed to not read any of my posts in full just so you can say that I don't understand. Weird.

 

[SoundAndMotion]

You've managed to not read any of my posts in full just so you can say that I don't understand. Weird.

No.

@kid vic , I am no fan of bigshot. I have written many posts criticizing many of his posts. We're not BFFs. But truth outweighs ego. No matter how much blood I'll shed or pain my ego will endure, I have to say: in this thread, bigshot seems to have read and understood all your posts, and has given very good advice.

You say you understand all he has written. If true, you don't seem to understand what's going on in your integrateds. The simplest path for the signal goes through 3 stages between step-up transformer and headphones: 1-phono preamp > 2-main preamp (with volume, tone, balance, etc.) > 3-power amp. bigshot proposes using one of the stage-1s to feed stages-2,3 of whichever you choose. Even choosing stage 1 of one integrated and 2,3 of the other is much less vulnerable to noise/interference/interaction than your switcher and y-adapter ideas.

 

[bigshot]

If he doesn't want to listen, I don't have to help him. I'm happy to dismiss people who don't want to listen. It's not my job. He doesn't understand the difference between turntable output and line level. I tried to say it as simply as I could so he would get what I was saying. I don't think anyone will get through.

Most of my problems are with people who don't listen to what I am actually saying.

 

[sander99]

@kid vic:
I understand it is not ideal to have two amps powered up, but maybe the drawing below helps to understand why it does work (without "double amping"):
(This is just one example of typical integrated amps, there are variations like no tape monitor switch, more tape monitor switches, or one or more seperate record out selectors, but in all those cases the phono signal will only go through each of the 3 stages (as mentioned by @SoundAndMotion) once when connecting the record output of the first amp to a line level input of the second amp.)

 

[bigshot]

I don’t think he’ll make head not tail out of that schematic.

 

[kid vic]

@kid vic:
I understand it is not ideal to have two amps powered up, but maybe the drawing below helps to understand why it does work (without "double amping"):
(This is just one example of typical integrated amps, there are variations like no tape monitor switch, more tape monitor switches, or one or more seperate record out selectors, but in all those cases the phono signal will only go through each of the 3 stages (as mentioned by @SoundAndMotion) once when connecting the record output of the first amp to a line level input of the second amp.)

I think you guys are caught up on the words I used. The reason I bought a second integrated amp with a phone stage was to use that phono stage.
I'm not saying it doesn't work, I'm saying it's not the method I want to use.
Thanks for the additional clarification though, it's just not the method that gives me the answer I want. If saying "double amping" is wrong that's fine, the underlying point is still the same.

 

[kid vic]

No.

@kid vic , I am no fan of bigshot. I have written many posts criticizing many of his posts. We're not BFFs. But truth outweighs ego. No matter how much blood I'll shed or pain my ego will endure, I have to say: in this thread, bigshot seems to have read and understood all your posts, and has given very good advice.

You say you understand all he has written. If true, you don't seem to understand what's going on in your integrateds. The simplest path for the signal goes through 3 stages between step-up transformer and headphones: 1-phono preamp > 2-main preamp (with volume, tone, balance, etc.) > 3-power amp. bigshot proposes using one of the stage-1s to feed stages-2,3 of whichever you choose. Even choosing stage 1 of one integrated and 2,3 of the other is much less vulnerable to noise/interference/interaction than your switcher and y-adapter ideas.

I scrapped the switcher idea when he pointed out that any other switch or cable combo wouldn't make a difference and the Y-adapter I assumed wouldn't work.
I'm really just not interested in using both amps at the same time. That's really all there is to it. If I get sick of changing inputs I can use the tape outs as proposed.

 

[sander99]

The reason I bought a second integrated amp with a phone stage was to use that phono stage.

I figured and understand that would be a possible reason, but I was not sure and I wanted to make sure you didn't reject our idea for the wrong reason. So no problem, sorry I can not help you better.

 

[kid vic]

I figured and understand that would be a possible reason, but I was not sure and I wanted to make sure you didn't reject our idea for the wrong reason. So no problem, sorry I can not help you better.

Thanks for trying though.